|
Randy Cassingham's BlogHistorical Details and Author's Notes from This is True®
|
Lolita Midsleeper Combi
I thought many readers would like to see the photos that go with a story from this week's issue, and maybe you will have examples of other "inappropriate" products, especially for children. First, the story:
Free Weird Newsletter
Who?
The staff of the U.K. branch of the Woolworths department stores didn't see anything wrong with the bedroom set designed for 6-year-old girls: it was dubbed the "Lolita Midsleeper Combi" and sold for 395 pounds (US$769) on the store's web site. The store refused to withdraw or rename the product because it wanted to "follow current trends," but a U.K.-based child-raising online forum continued to raise a fuss until the store bothered to investigate why "Lolita" might be an inappropriate marketing tactic. The 1955 book Lolita, which was adapted to film in 1962 and 1997, is about the narrator's sexual relationship with a 12-year-old girl. "We had to look it up" online to understand why shoppers were upset, a Woolworth's spokesman said, claiming no one knew who "Lolita" was. "We certainly know who she is now." The bed has been taken off the market, the spokesman confirmed. "We will be talking to the supplier with regard to how the branding came about." (London Times) ...Surely it was suggested by the children's department manager, Mr. Humbert.
The photos include a screen shot from the web offering (complete with typo):
While I was researching this, I found one blogger who particularly chuckled over the bit about the "perfect space-saving solution". Gee: why would a pedophile pay $769 for a bed when the real space-saving innovation would be to have the kid sleep in your bed with you? But that's not something I'd say....
The second shot is a close-up of the item:
What other inappropriate, absurd, perhaps even sexual item have you seen advertised for children? Tell me about it in the comments area. (I do have one other example from True: "pimp" and "ho" Halloween costumes -- for kids.)
RSS
Most Recent Comments
Posted by James, Mexico on July 14, 2008:
Loli-con as a fashion started in Japan from people dressing up as manga and anime characters, something that has been around for a while. It's not just hentai that has girls dressed up in school uniforms, most action manga comics do too -- probably because the target audience is largely of teenage years. That being said, it was obviously named after Nabakov's book.
And yes, Lolita is a common name in many countries.
While I don't think the naming of the bed is anything to get too upset about, it was a particularly stupid move on the part of the vendors. When you name a product you research the name, and you don't choose one that could offend or even put off a section of your target audience -- in this case parents of young girls. It's the same reason you don't name an airline "Icarus", it's just not the connotation you want.
Posted by Jeff, USA on January 3, 2009:
Randy, the FCUK reply is one that would have been great for the newsletter, but a better comeback here would be to point out that the poster is confusing brands.
Aeropostale is a relatively benign clothing company, even if the styles are a bit tart-y for 11-year-olds. A&F (which owns Hollister, among others) was the purveyor of the infamous porn catalog. At least they didn't glorify murderers, like Beneton did in one of its campaigns ... Heck, you could probably do a "special edition" of inappropriate ads by clothing brands aimed at teens!
---
Probably, but teens and prepubescent girls are two very different things! -rc
Posted by Jim, California on January 9, 2009:
I can't find them now, but a couple of years ago somebody showed me officially licensed Disney products from Japan: Mickey Mouse and Winnie-the-Pooh "personal massagers." The one was topped with Mickey's gloved hand, and the other had Pooh's "hunny pot" on it.
I swear I am not making this up.